Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

However, that's where Traviss fits into the Star Wars universe, and trying to give her greater access to the universe at large was disastrous. Traviss herself admits to a distaste for the superhuman. She likes telling human stories, and for her, that means human limitations. She has a certain animosity toward superhuman characters that almost comes across as jealousy. This doesn't really work in her favor in a universe where the stars of the universe are superhuman, where the primary mechanic of the universe is a super power.

Actually this is exactly what works for her and she really in many ways shares this with Zahn, albeit her writing more overtly expresses this distaste of the superhuman qualities of the Jedi, but again she writes almost entirely about/for the Mandalorians so this distaste is appropriate. Read Outbound Flight and Zahn has a similar dislike of how the Jedi's abilities can make them assume they are superior and know what is right for the rest of the galaxy. Regardless of who the writer is, this questioning of the place of Jedi/Sith is actually something Star Wars needs, if it is going to come across as anything but a universe full of glowstick sycophants.

In regards to bad Star Wars books, I just finished Red Harvest. I didn't expect anything great, but a mix of SW and zombies sounds like fun brain candy, sadly Schreiber really just phoned this one in. I would have simply thrown the book out the moment the author quoted the movie Taken basically verbatim, except it was a kindle version.

About Tycho's news post, what did he mean when he said "with combat that is immediate and kinetic and substantially less SCA."?

He is probably talking about the fact that for Reckoning combat is more twitch based as I understand it. SCA is the society of the creative anachronism they often try to codify and enact their versions of medieval fighting, in this case I think it is a reference to the "dice" roll type of combat of many an RPG.

About Tycho's news post, what did he mean when he said "with combat that is immediate and kinetic and substantially less SCA."?

He is probably talking about the fact that for Reckoning combat is more twitch based as I understand it. SCA is the society of the creative anachronism they often try to codify and enact their versions of medieval fighting, in this case I think it is a reference to the "dice" roll type of combat of many an RPG.

I'm in the SCA, so I know how the combat works (and I get to fight today!!!), and it seems pretty intense when you're swinging stick. It is slower to watch than Orcs Must Die or something like that. I was just wondering where he was coming from.

About Tycho's news post, what did he mean when he said "with combat that is immediate and kinetic and substantially less SCA."?

He is probably talking about the fact that for Reckoning combat is more twitch based as I understand it. SCA is the society of the creative anachronism they often try to codify and enact their versions of medieval fighting, in this case I think it is a reference to the "dice" roll type of combat of many an RPG.

I'm in the SCA, so I know how the combat works (and I get to fight today!!!), and it seems pretty intense when you're swinging stick. It is slower to watch than Orcs Must Die or something like that. I was just wondering where he was coming from.

I would guess it is more a hyperbolic statement, Reckoning has been hyped as very "fast paced". I have no idea how familiar he is with SCA, so it might even be based on perceived pace rather than experienced.

About Tycho's news post, what did he mean when he said "with combat that is immediate and kinetic and substantially less SCA."?

He is probably talking about the fact that for Reckoning combat is more twitch based as I understand it. SCA is the society of the creative anachronism they often try to codify and enact their versions of medieval fighting, in this case I think it is a reference to the "dice" roll type of combat of many an RPG.

I'm in the SCA, so I know how the combat works (and I get to fight today!!!), and it seems pretty intense when you're swinging stick. It is slower to watch than Orcs Must Die or something like that. I was just wondering where he was coming from.

He was poking fun at the SCA. Poking fun is a thing that Mike and Jerry often do! I do not imagine it represents an authentic position he was prepared to take a stand on and fight for.

Welcome to the world all Star Trek fans lived in until the Abrams movie came out. Star Wars fans were openly derisive of Trek fans until the prequels came along and they suddenly didn't have a leg to stand on. It's okay for a franchise to have less than stellar entries. Star Wars just got away with not having any for a lot longer than most other franchises, and when people turned on it, it happened in a world that now had the Internet. So the hate wasn't contained to your local circles, you were now seeing the hate from all over. It's been like this for every franchise.

Keep right on loving Star Wars, but take it less seriously. And that's something every fan of every franchise should do as well.

Pretty much. I'm a "Star Trek fundamentalist". That is, I believe only in TOS and TNG. I don't even believe in the TNG movies (particularly First Contact) because of the canon problems.

But, then again, I'm totally okay with things like "cloaking devices", so I really can't take my love of Trek too seriously.

(somehow end up in the middle of arguments where people will spent tons of time attempting to convince me that DS9 is the best Star Trek, though)

About Tycho's news post, what did he mean when he said "with combat that is immediate and kinetic and substantially less SCA."?

He is probably talking about the fact that for Reckoning combat is more twitch based as I understand it. SCA is the society of the creative anachronism they often try to codify and enact their versions of medieval fighting, in this case I think it is a reference to the "dice" roll type of combat of many an RPG.

I'm in the SCA, so I know how the combat works (and I get to fight today!!!), and it seems pretty intense when you're swinging stick. It is slower to watch than Orcs Must Die or something like that. I was just wondering where he was coming from.

He was poking fun at the SCA. Poking fun is a thing that Mike and Jerry often do! I do not imagine it represents an authentic position he was prepared to take a stand on and fight for.

Oh it's cool and all. I was just confused on what they were poking fun at them (us) for. Some people are morons and charge in heedless, and watching a Crown tourney is watching two awesome fighters twitch slightly at each other until one finds a 1cm opening that he rips the other guy's head off in precisely 15 nanoseconds.

Since I have a certain penchant for long posts myself, I feel like replying to some of the things you wrote, even though Star Wars in general is not something anyone should quiz me in. Ever.

I would assume explaining the way you feel about your favourite franchise to this particular community borders almost on the redundant. By definition geeks and nerds are extremely likely to have very similar devotion to their favourite thing (you have no idea the relationship I have to stories). Now, it gets more problematic when it comes to actually voicing anything about these stories. Things can be objectively bad, and stupid. Because of my relationship to stories, I can get literally angry at a writer for crafting plot holes which move on to deeply impact the story. In a story, plot holes, inconsistencies and even simply ineptitude (in writing) become criteria to judge and possibly condemn. Whereas you go to a place where you overlook these, because you innocently and purely enjoy the product, the critics go to a place where they tear at them like wolves. Those sentiments come from the same place - love for a franchise. Your love is blind, whereas the other party feels like their love has just been ravaged. I love your attitude. I'd love to be able to not get angry and too "heady" about stories . But I do. And so I go out there and vent. It's kind of a coping mechanism. I don't have anything else to lash out on, but I need to, when a tale I was emotionally invested in takes a bad turn (quality wise). It's interesting - so far I always was kind of infuriated when others didn't see the problems with a story that I saw, because I always felt like they effectively validated badness. I think I'll be more wary in the future, appreciating that these people actually have it better than me, being able to enjoy the story (you know... unless they're simply stupid trolls).
This is, by the way, completely general, and not specific to the Star Wars franchise.

I also think that there's two more problems with those internet mobs. First, people can tend to be obsessed with alternate universes. They read a story, and get so invested in it, they have already painted all the potential, possibly super-awesome, outcomes. When a writer fails those built expectations, he/she's stupid. And often, obsessed fans know the universes better than the writer. There is, of course, a degree to which a writer should be educated in the universe the story takes place in. But they are, after all, only people and have so much more to think about than minutiae, or maybe might just slip on occassion on account of a bad day. Obsessive fans rarely see, let alone forgive that.
Again, this is in general, mainly because you wrote of the alienation and sting felt upon negative comments on Star Wars.
Altogether, I think that'd be my answer as to why fans might react with disdain. Their passion and devotion, and unhealthy obsession (and it is unhealthy when it leads to anger, and it is something I as well suffer from) are "betrayed" by a bad iteration of the story. And when a bad iteration of a story costs some popular or at least important character his/her life, or otherwise affects the entire tale thereafter, expect a very passionate backlash in which even innocent people get smacked. That's not appropriate. But highly emotional reactions rarely are.
But, sadly, I can't give input directly on the Star Wars debate. I can certainly imagine the fervor of that franchise's fans (even George Lucas isn't prepared to deal with that anymore), but I simply don't know. It's always stupid when people get SO worked up about something, and so genuinely sad when that prevents them from enjoying something actually good, but that's the cost of being a nerd, I think. I mean, if you have this world you literally escape to, because you need it for all those times the world sucks, and your retreat is being stunk up...

I can't comment on the Traviss debate, I'm afraid (I'm a poet!), even though that's like... 75% of the post, but anyways... I can at least say that what I've read about her behaviour seems to me like she has no true appreciation for the craft of writing. She makes changes of a very permanent kind to another author's creation? She plays with canon without authorization and then gets pissed for it to be subverted by the series creator himself? Her comments regarding fans who do not support her don't seem endearing, either. That's so strange to me - to hire her, then, when there's such an army of talent willing to kill for a writing spot on that franchise, and deeply appreciative of the established universe. I always assumed there'd be rigorous screening involved before being allowed your mitts on a sanctioned Star Wars novel.

@ the comic
I expected "Magistrate Couscous" to get more love.
On another note, the art was... a tad lazy.

Jacen Solo's fall is one of the most contrived, poorly-written happenings in Star Wars canon, and that's saying something when you consider the Jedi Academy trilogy, Anakin and Padme's romance, and The Crystal Star.

Care to elaborate? I thought it was pretty well done, compared to most of the "Grrr, I want more power because MORE POWER" falls from most of the EU, which really seem more like stepping off a curb than anything else. I haven't read it in a while, though, so if there's a breakdown of the stupid, I'd love to see it.

That's my main problem, the "stupid" in question. Traviss tends to shove the Idiot Ball into people's hands to make her plots go forward. Jacen decides he can pretty much make the same choices his grandfather did, and remain himself because...a Sith (Lumiya) told him he could. Idiot Ball.

I snipped the rest because it's mostly all stuff I've already seen and agreed with, but I've always felt like Jacen's fall is one thing Traviss did relatively well. I was kinda hoping for elaboration on that specifically.

To me, it felt like it followed naturally from the progression of the previous few novels; Jacen's studies moved him away from seeing the Force as Light vs. Dark (concordantly, taking advice from a Sith didn't seem like such a bad idea, especially when another Sith basically kept him alive through the YV invasion), which put him in a position to come down on the side of Dark. Anakin's fall really felt more like "Me sad. Now me worried. NOW ME ANGRY!" I mean, Jacen was ostensibly motivated by trying to save the galaxy from some horrible fate he envisioned, whereas Anakin basically decided it was okay to murder anyone he could on the off chance it might protect his wife.

Granted, a lot of the reason Jacen's fall seemed so believable was due to the events of previous books, which Traviss didn't really have anything to do with. I don't know, it's been a while since I read LotF, and it wasn't exactly with the most critical eye. Hence, I welcome the thoughts of someone who did read it more critically.

In regards to bad Star Wars books, I just finished Red Harvest. I didn't expect anything great, but a mix of SW and zombies sounds like fun brain candy, sadly Schreiber really just phoned this one in. I would have simply thrown the book out the moment the author quoted the movie Taken basically verbatim, except it was a kindle version.

Did you read Death Troopers, Schreiber's fist Star Wars zombie novel? That one is much better.

In regards to bad Star Wars books, I just finished Red Harvest. I didn't expect anything great, but a mix of SW and zombies sounds like fun brain candy, sadly Schreiber really just phoned this one in. I would have simply thrown the book out the moment the author quoted the movie Taken basically verbatim, except it was a kindle version.

Did you read Death Troopers, Schreiber's fist Star Wars zombie novel? That one is much better.

I am planning on reading that one as I've heard good things. I just figured I'd give the "prequel" a shot especially since I'm playing TOR and so Old Republic stuff is interesting at the moment.

Welcome to the world all Star Trek fans lived in until the Abrams movie came out. Star Wars fans were openly derisive of Trek fans until the prequels came along and they suddenly didn't have a leg to stand on. It's okay for a franchise to have less than stellar entries. Star Wars just got away with not having any for a lot longer than most other franchises, and when people turned on it, it happened in a world that now had the Internet. So the hate wasn't contained to your local circles, you were now seeing the hate from all over. It's been like this for every franchise.

Keep right on loving Star Wars, but take it less seriously. And that's something every fan of every franchise should do as well.

Taking it less seriously would have the effects of cutting off both the peaks and valleys of fandom. I'm disappointed in general in how our society tends to dismiss things they don't personally like as bad, but I'm willing to endure the downs in order to have to ups. I'm personally guilty of deriding things I don't like as well, I think all of us are. I think it's human nature.

However, I think our society is evolving more and more towards personal freedom, and it's time to realize other people's taste is having less and less effect on your life. Whenever I hear, read, or see something I don't like and have the reaction to say it's terrible, I remind myself how I feel when someone says the same about something I like, or worse, something I wrote. I remind myself that it may not be for me, but someone out there probably likes it, and someone out there is probably proud of it. Even if that isn't the case, it's presence doesn't hurt anything, because we live in a world of vast options, where we can avoid what we don't like and seek out what we do.

It may sound silly to a lot of people, but Star Wars just makes me happy. It's something that I can always count on to take me to a good place mentally. I don't care about the things that are bad in it, Star Wars is so big and so filled with awesome and wondrous things, I feel no need to dwell upon the things that aren't good.

In fact, I think Star Wars' sloppy writing has taught me to be better able to enjoy fiction of all types and quality levels. Many people call people like me apologists, and I guess on some level that's accurate. They say it like it is a bad thing though, and I don't see it that way. I don't see any reason to look at fiction with a rigid and critical mind and let it cost you the enjoyment.

I prefer when enjoying a fictional story, be it a movie, book, or whatever, to use my own creativity to patch over holes as my mind finds them. I prefer to simply explain away inconsistencies however I can. In fact, being a creative, I prefer this. If a book concisely explains everything to me and leaves me with nothing to think about or puzzle over, it is quickly forgotten.

For example, on of the biggest inconsistencies the prequels created was Leia claiming to recall her mother, who died during child birth. To me, I just figure that her mother was a senator, so she probably saw holos of her, and her adoptive father was a friend of her mother, so she also heard stories. The impression she had of her mother as a sad woman was probably an impression made on her during her traumatic birth while her mother died of a broken heart.

Some people say that it's silly to make up your own plot hole patches, that they aren't canon, so they aren't real, so they don't fix the problem. I accept that they aren't real, but I think of it as if it's not that, it's probably something like that, but the explaination just isn't that important. I can think of reasons for it to be that way, so it's fine to me. The only things I consider real plot holes are things I just cannot rectify in my own mind. Some people will also say they shouldn't have to think up their own reasons, but I just can't empathize with that. I enjoy doing it. Honestly, it sort of strikes me as lazy minded to insist not to have to connect your own dots and draw your own conclusions.

People seem to think having exclusive tastes is a good thing, that it makes your tastes more refined and elegant. To me, however, I wonder why one would be happy about having tastes that allow one only to enjoy the very best of a thing. The very best is always a small percentage of what is available, and I prefer to enjoy more things rather than only enjoy the very best.

Perhaps these people just have less time to enjoy entertainment in their lives, and feel the need to be exclusive to get the best quality to quantity ratio as possible. That's fair enough I suppose. At the same time, I often wonder if that's the case, how it is possible these are the same people spending their time on fan forums talking about how terrible something is. If their time is so precious that they need to be so exclusive, shouldn't they spend that time thinking about and discussing things they actually like?

I didn't like Jar Jar Binks, or "Are you an Angel?" but Pod Racing was cool, and Darth Maul was a bad ass. Hayden's acting wasn't great, even kinda bad sometimes, but Ewan McGregor more than made up for that. The prequel droids were silly and annoying, but the lightsaber combat was mind blowing. Chewbacca didn't need to make a cameo, but seeing a wookie army was worth it.

The things I'm saying aren't exclusive to Star Wars, it really applies to all of fandom, Star Wars is just my favorite IP, so it's the easiest one for me to base my observations upon. Writing these long winded posts isn't about defending Star Wars, it's up to each individual what they like. It's really about thinking about how you approach fandom, and whether it's the most valuable way to do so. Do the things you are doing bring you more enjoyment, or less? It's worth thinking about, I think.

Seriously, that's exactly how I feel about it. I just enjoy it, even the horrible parts, and I too look for my own ways of patching up all the holes. Although, the Darth Plagueis novel seems to be doing that for me this time around...

I enjoyed all three of the prequels and am certainly one of the people who is tired of reading the hive-mind trash the same two or three flaws in them as though they are the first person enlightened enough to have noticed them.

One of my problems with the prequels is his need to shoehorn every original trilogy character into the prequel trilogy whether it makes sense or not. Droids are manufactured. They don't need a back story besides "they were made in a factory and someone bought them." Now I can't watch the original trilogy without knowing Darth Vader built R2-D2 and C-3PO and how much that doesn't makes sense.

But you also have to look at the relationship between the fans/critics and the authors. By holding the author's feet to the fire once in a while, you help them recognize their mistakes so that they can make improvements to their future works. That helps to elevate the art and is beneficial to both the fans and the author(s).

If you just keep accepting mediocre or crappy work, you give no incentive for the authors to hone their craft. What's worse is that it can create a cycle where fans accept lower and lower quality work, which hurts the fans, the authors, and the franchise as a whole.

Now, certainly there are some lost causes like George Lucas and Rick Berman, but that doesn't mean you should give up on the franchise and just accept whatever putrid half digested products that spew out of its maw. There may come a time when you need to step away from something you love so you don't support its self destruction.

To me, it's sort of a self correcting system. These books are written in an incredibly short span of time to meet an increasing demand (with Darth Plagueis being the odd book that takes 5 years). Meanwhile, the Internet has created a system in which authors and editors can look at fans' comments, and using that and sales, can determine what works best. For example, the latest 9-book series (which are all in hardcover, in this economy believe it or not) is supposedly the last long series they're going to do, because of fans' stated dislike of the longer series which fall into the trap of having not enough plot to substantiate a 9-book series. I think if they start to do smaller series, give authors their own series to work in, and keep pumping out the excellent standalone novels that have been coming out, the Star Wars novel landscape is gonna look really great.

On the quality side, it's all up to opinion. I personally love a lot of what Troy Denning has brought to the table, Christine Golden is pretty decent, and Aaron Allston is regularly great. Luceno, who writes books now and again, is amazing. Stover is brilliant, but he hasn't written anything since Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor. Paul S. Kemp is one of my favorite authors thanks to some great novels he's written, and the random other authors seem to be doing well with whatever standalones they do.

I am a very positive person when it comes to Star Wars EU, but I wouldn't call what we have now mediocre or bad; especially with the new not-as-long novel cycles that are supposedly in the works.

Fingers crossed though.

tl;dr I think novels now are just fine, thanks, but it's ultimately a matter of opinion exactly what 'quality' is.

the main thing I liked about the prequels (I think it was the Phantom Menace) is that the get-up for the trade federation senator made him look kind of like an Evil Pope.

Evil Pope? I can't imagine what that would look like...

I always wondered if these eerie similarities to the Pope and Catholicism were intentional. Palpatine always sounded like "Papal" and "Palatine" two Latin words related to the Papacy. Then there's the wardrobe.

For example, the latest 9-book series (which are all in hardcover, in this economy believe it or not) is supposedly the last long series they're going to do, because of fans' stated dislike of the longer series which fall into the trap of having not enough plot to substantiate a 9-book series. I think if they start to do smaller series, give authors their own series to work in, and keep pumping out the excellent standalone novels that have been coming out, the Star Wars novel landscape is gonna look really great.

Yay, I hope this is true. One of the most daunting things about the EU are all these long series of novels like New Jedi Order and everything that comes after it. I don't really want to have to buy and read all of those novels to understand the story. I rather like the shorter trilogies or standalone novels here and there.

The only thing I didnt' like about the prequels was the green screen effect. The backgrounds just... they don't hold up well, and it bothers me.

Cool lightsaber battles, though.

Man, some people hate the prequel lightsabre battles because there's more energy and movement in it; they're like kung fu warriors now instead of olde timey knights - which makes plenty of sense, right? The only part of a lightsabre that has any weight to it is the hilt, so you would be able to swing it all over the place effortlessly. And "they swing the lightsabres around like they're not even trying to hit them" - which I don't really agree with; it's more like they use a lot of feints to try and one up the other dude.

Episode III has my single favourite lightsabre moment; when they're moving through the corridor, slicing it up as they go. That shot is so great. Blue on Blue wasn't as interesting, visually, though.

Both the original trilogy and prequel trilogy lightsaber fighting styles have their good points and bad points. The original fights are more like Kendo than anything else, with a sort of deliberate, economy-of-movement purposefulness to them. In retrospect though I can easily see how they might seem boring to some people. The prequel fights are obviously a lot more visually impressive, with amazing choreography (Dooku's elegant, fencing style is my favorite). On the other hand, at worst they're all flash and no substance, with so many fast, over-the-top movements that it starts to look meaningless.

When I was about 15 I realized that my Diablo novel was stupid, and since then I have not read a single damn EU-Anything book that I would call "good." Certainly, I know how to suspend my expectations and just enjoy a story, but I've read good authors and there's no effing contest.
I have read very little Star Wars EU. Almost none, in fact. I recently dipped my feet in the water with those SWTOR novels, and the water was not nice. I feel strongly that SW is a setting where some profound shit could take place, but I'm afraid to dig in and find out. Slaign's very detailed post does not give me hope.

0

Burden of ProofYou three boys picked a beautiful hill to die on.Registered Userregular

When I was about 15 I realized that my Diablo novel was stupid, and since then I have not read a single damn EU-Anything book that I would call "good." Certainly, I know how to suspend my expectations and just enjoy a story, but I've read good authors and there's no effing contest.
I have read very little Star Wars EU. Almost none, in fact. I recently dipped my feet in the water with those SWTOR novels, and the water was not nice. I feel strongly that SW is a setting where some profound shit could take place, but I'm afraid to dig in and find out. Slaign's very detailed post does not give me hope.

Loving a franchise is one thing, but just blindly adoring everything that has the Star Wars logo on it doesn't do anyone any good, especially the super fan.

I know that bringing up the Red Letter Media reviews is a quick and easy tactic for Star Wars critics, but bear in mind that he eviscerated all the Star Trek movies as well, and as a person who loves, LOVES Star Trek, it was important for fans like me and the Star Trek filmmakers to recognize the major flaws in those films so that the franchise as a whole could evolve and improve.

And it did.

The problem with the whole "Lucas's films, Lucas's way" attitude is that it negates the creative contribution of the thousands of other people that worked on the films. Empire and Jedi were directed by other people, Kasdan's writing is responsible for a lot of the character traits that people accept as a given, and even something like Harrison Ford improvising when the lines he was given were shit... They all combined to make Star Wars, it wasn't like Lucas was drawing creature designs.

I'd love to see someone else get a chance to reimagine Star Wars for the big screen. You never know when you're going to hit creative oil. Gene Roddenberry would have despised Deep Space 9, and there are plenty of Star Trek fans that couldn't imagine the "canon" without it.